The government averts a potentially damaging Commons defeat over House of Lords reform by cancelling the vote after admitting it had only a slim chance of winning.
The coalition dropped its timetable for the House of Lords Reform Bill after a significant Tory revolt dealt a serious blow to Deputy Leader Nick Clegg’s plans.
Mr Clegg had argued it was essential that the bill had a timetable to prevent MPs endlessly debating and using marathon speeches that would allow opponents to “talk out” the legislation in an open-ended process.
When it became apparent the government would lose, Commons Leader Sir George Young announced there would be no vote on the “programme motion” that set out time limits for the bill’s next stages during a second day of debate.
But there will be a vote on the principle of an elected Lords, which is supported by Labour, and senior Conservative MP Michael Fallon told Channel 4 News he expected this to be approved “with a very big majority”.
@Channel4News Reform is absolutelyrequired & overdue; this attempt at reform is imperfect but certainly better than the current system.
— Iain Collins (@iaincollins) July 10, 2012
Both Labour and Conservative MPs opposed plans to give members at the committee stage only 10 days to conduct a detailed, line-by-line analysis of the proposed legislation.
The deputy prime minister was mauled by Tory backbenchers on Monday as he opened a two-day debate which could have far-reaching consequences for the coalition.
Although the bill has the backing of both the Conservative and Liberal Democrat leaderships, it is regarded as vital to the Lib Dems after their defeat in the referendum on AV voting reform for parliamentary elections.
Before the announcement, Downing Street had confirmed all members of the government – including unpaid ministerial aides – would be expected to vote for the legislation.
About 70 Conservatives backbenchers had signed a letter warning the plans for a mainly elected upper chamber threatened a “constitutional crisis” and calling for the bill to be given “full and unrestricted” scrutiny.
Signatories included a number of select committee chairmen – among them Bernard Jenkin, John Whittingdale, James Arbuthnot and Bill Cash – as well as the former shadow home secretary David Davis.
Opponents of reform argue that an elected House of Lords could undermine the traditional primacy of the Commons, leading to constitutional deadlock.
Lib Dem Foreign Office Minister Jeremy Browne had said there would be “consequences” if Tory MPs succeeding in defeating the timetable motion but denied making threats.
@Channel4News When the country is back on its feet maybe then Lords reform can be looked at.
— Carol Clasper (@featheronawire) July 10, 2012
@Channel4News When the country is back on its feet maybe then Lords reform can be looked at.
— Carol Clasper (@featheronawire) July 10, 2012
A Channel 4 News Twitter survey asked whether followers thought Lords reform was a good idea, bad idea, or something they did not care about.
About 60 per cent of responses were in favour of reform, and about 22 per cent said they did not care. Those who said they did not care were mostly complaining that there are currently more important issues the government should be addressing.